Home
October 2008 November 2008 December 2008
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 44 1
Week 45 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Week 46 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Week 47 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Week 48 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Week 49 30

European Urology - Clinically Overt Venous Thromboembolism after Urologic Cancer Surgery: Results from the @RISTOS Study Show Comments PDF Print E-mail
  
Monday, 01 January 2007
Volume 51, Issue 1, Pages 130-136 (January 2007)

Abstract
-

Objective:

Incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and need for thromboprophylaxis in urologic surgery have received little attention since only one randomised study has addressed this issue in the last 20 yr. The present prospective observational study evaluated incidence and risk factors for clinically overt VTE in a wide spectrum of consecutive patients undergoing surgery for cancer and compared findings in urologic patients with those in patients undergoing general or gynaecologic surgery.

Methods

Patients having cancer surgery (general surgery, gynaecology, urology) were assessed for clinically overt VTE occurring up to 30±5 d after intervention or more if the hospital stay was longer. All suspected VTE events were evaluated by an external independent Adjudication Committee.

Results

A total of 2373 patients, 1238 (52%) undergoing general surgery, 685 (29%) urologic, and 450 (19%) gynaecologic surgery were evaluated. In urologic patients, most procedures (61%) were endoscopic, with bladder and prostate cancer being the most frequent tumours. In-hospital thromboprophylaxis was given to 71.7% of patients, whereas 32.5% received prophylaxis after discharge. The incidence of VTE in urologic patients was lower (0.87%) than that in general surgery and gynaecologic patients (2.8% and 2.0%, respectively). VTE consisted of three cases of nonfatal and three cases of fatal pulmonary embolism (PE). In four of the six cases, VTE occurred during prophylaxis.

Conclusions

VTE still represents a severe complication and remains the most common cause of death after urologic cancer surgery. Efforts should be made to optimise prophylactic measures to further reduce such risk.

Roberto M. Scarpa, Giuseppe Carrieri, Gualberto Gussoni, Andrea Tubaro, Giario Conti, Vincenzo Pagliarulo, Vincenzo Mirone, Antonello De Lisa, Gaspare Fiaccavento, Luigi Cormio, Erminio Bonizzoni, Giancarlo Agnelli

Division of Urology, University of Turin, Orbassano, Italy
Division of Urology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
Scientific Department, Italfarmaco S.p.A., Milan, Italy
Department of Urology, 2nd School of Medicine, “La Sapienza” University, Rome, Italy
Division of Urology, St. Anna Hospital, Como, Italy
Department of Urology II, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
Department of Urology, University “Federico II”, Naples, Italy
Division of Urology, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Department of Urology, Portogruaro Hospital, Portogruaro, Italy
Institute of Medical Statistics and Biometry, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
Division of Internal and Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

Accepted 13 July 2006 published online 31 July 2006.

Reader Comments

Please log-in or register in order to submit comments.

Powered by AkoComment!

 
User Rating: / 0
PoorBest


 
< Prev   Next >